Andy MacNae MP: speeches 2026

Speeches

• 24 Mar 2026 · Sudden Unexplained Death in Childhood · Hansard source

  More

  I thank everyone who has contributed to this debate. I thank the shadow Minister, the hon. Member for Sleaford and North Hykeham (Dr Johnson), for bringing her depth of professional experience. I also thank the Minister for her comprehensive response to the points raised. I want to reflect on a couple of the issues that were raised. First, I thank the hon. Member for Spelthorne (Lincoln Jopp) for taking me to task on describing SUDC as a cause of death. He is absolutely right: it is not; it is simply a category of the unknown. That is worth reflecting on, because it puts into context the request from my hon. Friend the Member for Altrincham and Sale West (Mr Rand) that we focus on understanding, predicting and preventing. When we combine that great unknown with that appeal to simply understand, we recognise the challenge, but also the imperative to make progress in this area. It is clear that there is an absolute consensus across both sides of the House in calling for a plan and the prioritisation of this issue. It was good to hear the Minister recognising the importance of that. Bereavement support came up several times. We have so much terminology: bereavement support, bereavement care and longer-term mental health support. The moment at which a family needs support to deal with the trauma of loss can vary greatly. It can be a day, week or year after the loss and having the right support at the right time remains absolutely vital. I very much hope and believe that it is something that the parent services and maternity safety investigation and the ongoing taskforce will grasp as a priority in their work. To reflect on some of the commitments made by the Minister, I think she has recognised that some things can be done quickly and effectively—simply getting good information about SUDC up on the website seems to be an obvious imperative that we can be acting on. However, Members have raised a range of opportunities, in particular the opportunity to build on the charity-funded research done so far and move it into Government-funded research. I would be grateful if the Minister agreed to meet with me and SUDC UK to discuss how we can take this debate forward, because as hon. Members have said, it cannot stop here. This must be the start of an ongoing process where we build understanding, take action and get real change to create a genuine legacy—a legacy for Frankie and all the families affected. Again, I finish by thanking everyone in the Public Gallery for being here. It really matters, and I am so grateful for your presence. Question put and agreed to. Resolved, That this House has considered Sudden Unexplained Death in Childhood.

• 24 Mar 2026 · Sudden Unexplained Death in Childhood · Hansard source

  More

  I thank my hon. Friend for that intervention, which again focuses on the need for co-ordination in the effort to meet the scale of this challenge. One of the most compelling issues requiring investigation is the association between SUDC and febrile seizures. National and international data show that 30% of SUDC cases involve a history of febrile seizures—10 times higher than in the general population. Frankie Grogan had 12 seizures before he died, but he was never reviewed by a specialist. At this point, it is really important to stress that febrile seizures are very common and SUDC is rare, but the persistence of this correlation—known before the last debate—demands investigation. A national plan must accelerate understanding of the link and determine whether children who have repeated febrile seizures, or a particular subset of affected children, need different pathways of care. We must also improve public information. Information for families is inconsistent and, at times, invisible. Leaflets on febrile seizures vary significantly across NHS trusts; some fail to mention that seizures can occur during sleep or that monitoring options exist. SUDC itself—including the 60% of cases with no seizure history—is missing from the NHS website. After the 2023 debate, a token reference was added to the SIDS page, but then removed. Imagine a family receiving a post-mortem conclusion of SUDC but finding nothing when they search the NHS website. That is clearly unacceptable, but something that the Government can easily fix. There has been welcome progress in other areas. The national child mortality database is a world-leading resource. Since the previous debate, the NCMD has created SUDC-specific forms and launched pathways for genomics and cardiac screening. SUDC UK, a charity founded only in 2017, has helped to ensure that families have access to whole genome sequencing through the R441 pathway. That advocacy was born out of what Nikki Speed, chief executive of SUDC UK, describes as the “paralysing fear” that she and many families carry every day. She explained to me that for years after her loss, she got little sleep, because she was constantly having to have a hand on her surviving children to be sure they were alive and well. That fear leads families to delay trying for another child, even though a new life could be a source of hope and healing amid loss. It is completely rational for a parent to fear, if one of their seemingly healthy children has died without explanation, that their other seemingly healthy children could also be at risk. That is why genomic and cardiac screening is so important: it not only informs research but protects surviving siblings. For some families, genetic analysis has revealed risks requiring vital preventive treatment, yet those crucial tests are currently available only after the post-mortem process concludes, which brings me to the next point. Paediatric pathology is in crisis, as summarised in a recent report by the Royal College of Pathologists. Families experiencing SUDC routinely wait nine to 12 months, or sometimes longer, for a post-mortem conclusion. During that time, they live in fear—fear for their surviving children, fear of future pregnancies, fear of the unknown. Their grief is suspended and their lives are on hold. Only after that traumatic wait can they finally access genomic testing or cardiac screening to safeguard their children. After speaking with Brian and with Nikki, I would like to outline the typical timeline for a family affected by SUDC. Your child is fine. Then they die, leaving you traumatised and in shock. The child is taken away from you, and you have no control over what is happening. The ensuing process is statutory, but the response is based on evidence from infant death and so is suboptimal. After scary interactions with the police and in deep shock, you return home to deafening silence or to the child’s siblings, to whom you must tell the very worst news. Then you wait. You do not wait one week or two. You do not wait a month or even six. You most likely wait nine to 12 months. If the pathology is complex, you wait even longer. Throughout the whole wait, you are scared for your other children and scared to get pregnant again. You put your life and your grief on hold. Only then, often about a year later, do you receive the post-mortem report. You have been desperately waiting for this moment, but now it is here it brings back all the trauma of losing your child, and only now are you eligible to see whether anything hereditary is putting other family members at risk. This is inhumane. When we lost our daughter, we had the answers right away, yet the trauma is still with us. I cannot fathom what it would be like to sit in deafening silence for months, and the long-term damage that that could do. This must change. A national plan should establish faster pathways for cases in which timely information directly affects vulnerable bereaved families and child safety.

• 24 Mar 2026 · Sudden Unexplained Death in Childhood · Hansard source

  More

  Precisely, and that would be to treat this issue with the importance, urgency and focus that it deserves. The very fact that most research is now charity-led is quite revealing. This research includes the Pioneer study—a population-based investigation to reduce sudden unexplained deaths in childhood—at the University of Bristol, which is beginning to analyse national mortality data and incorporate family-led research priorities. Science has advanced: genomics, cardiology, neuropathology and data science now offer real hope that the causes that were once thought unknowable may finally be within reach. However, scientific possibility alone is not enough. Findings from the UK’s Pioneer study, alongside the growing body of global evidence on SUDC, must be properly considered and applied. They should inform linked datasets and guide action by organisations such as Genomics England, the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence, the National Institute for Health and Care Research, the Department of Health and Social Care and the NHS. The opportunity is there, but right now we rely far too much on this limited charity-funded research. If we are ever to shift the dial, as the hon. Member for East Londonderry (Mr Campbell) said, we need a national plan delivering co-ordinated, planned actions that enable and accelerate meaningful projects.

• 24 Mar 2026 · Sudden Unexplained Death in Childhood · Hansard source

  More

  I beg to move, That this House has considered Sudden Unexplained Death in Childhood. It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Sir John, and to open this important debate. Today we are discussing a category of child death that has previously been described in this room as “one of the most serious medical phenomena in our country”. —[ Official Report, 17 January 2023; Vol. 726, c. 88WH.] Sudden unexplained death in childhood is the fourth leading cause of death in children aged one to 18. Since Parliament last debated this issue in 2023, in the UK around 120 children who appeared perfectly healthy have died suddenly. That is the equivalent of four full classrooms of pre-school and school-aged children—four classrooms of lives cut short without explanation. For families, the devastation after a child dies is immediate and lifelong. What makes SUDC uniquely cruel is not only the loss, but the absence of answers. Why did those children die? I can only imagine the pain of that. When we lost our daughter Mallorie to Edwards’ syndrome, we at least had the comfort of knowing why and what was coming. We knew there was nothing more we could do. Families experiencing SUDC have none of that. It is brutal. We cannot continue to tell grieving parents, “I am sorry; we simply don’t know why your child died.” As a society we have a responsibility to do all we can to find the answers to prevent future deaths. That is why today we ask the Government to lead the search for answers through a co-ordinated national plan. First, let us be clear about what SUDC is and what it is not. Sudden unexplained death in childhood is the sudden unexpected death of a child over one year old that remains unexplained after a full investigation. Cases do not involve crime, terminal illness, diagnosed epilepsy, cardiac conditions or tragic accidents. The children appear healthy. They fall suddenly ill or go to sleep and never wake up. Parents, grandparents and siblings are left asking, “Why did this happen? Could it happen again? Is there a genetic risk? Will my other children die? Should we risk another pregnancy?” Those are questions that currently no one can answer. At the heart of today’s debate and our discussion is a little boy named Frankie Grogan. Frankie was three years old: bright, curious and full of energy with a particular love of giraffes. His family had every reason to believe that they would watch him grow and thrive. Instead, he went to sleep and did not wake up. The night before, Frankie was excited that his father would be running the Manchester 10k the next day. He briefly woke at 4.30 am asking for water. A few hours later, he was found to be still and unresponsive. Despite a thorough investigation, no cause of death could be identified. That happened in 2019 and Frankie’s family, who are here today, still do not know why. In the midst of unimaginable grief, Frankie’s grandfather, Brian Topping, came to see me. He did not ask for sympathy; he asked for structure, leadership, co-ordination and a plan. Frankie’s story reminds us that behind every statistic is a child with a name, a personality and a future that should have been. It is because of Frankie and the determination of his family that the debate is taking place today. Through SUDC UK, families, clinicians and researchers have united around the conviction that unexplained should never mean unexamined. We know that research and awareness raising, backed up by national leadership, can make a profound difference. In other areas of childhood death, when priorities are clear, progress follows.

• 4 Mar 2026 · Ministry of Defence · Hansard source

  More

  Current events are once again showing the vital importance of an agile and independent fast jet defence capability, and the UK is one of the few countries with a sovereign ability to manufacture these world-leading fast jets. The UK’s Typhoons are made in Lancashire, where over 20,000 jobs are reliant on maintaining that production. However, right now, assembly facilities lie empty. Last year, the Government secured a very important £8 billion deal with Turkey, which gives temporary protection for those jobs and will restart assembly, but the job is absolutely not done. We now need to look at how we take the next step and secure our production base and competitive position for the next decade and more. This is all about the UK committing to its own order of Typhoon jets, which is what we need to ensure our world-leading position and keep the skills and experience that were so crucial in securing the Turkey deal and will be crucial for other, future deals. A UK order means that the maximum value is retained here, with sections made at Samlesbury and full assembly at Warton. The UK ordering the latest Typhoon also indicates full confidence in the jet and allows us to stockpile, making further sales to other countries more likely. In any case, we need more fast jets. We had 137 Typhoons, but the 30 original tranche 1s are already being withdrawn from service and will be retired by 2027. This will leave 107 tranche 2 and 3 fighters, which are also ageing and are due for retirement in 2040, and lack the range of capabilities that can be delivered in the latest tranche 5 version. We can all get excited about the long-term potential of the global combat air programme, but it will be the late 2030s before those jets ever enter into service, leaving a capability gap. Part of that gap is being addressed by the purchase of the F-35s. These are exceptional aircraft, but they are a very different beast from the Typhoon. The F-35 is primarily a stealthy, ground-attack, precision-strike aircraft able to penetrate heavily defended airspace; the Typhoon is an air dominance fighter, with higher top speed, faster acceleration, better climb rate and superior sustained turn performance. It is also compatible with the full range of British-made missiles, such as the Meteor and the Spear 3, whereas the F-35 currently is not.

• 4 Mar 2026 · Ministry of Defence · Hansard source

  More

  Precisely, and of course the upgrade in the radar systems gives it the very latest capability to suppress at a distance. The Typhoon is a powerful beast and works so well within a blended capability, alongside F-35s and other craft. Other European countries have voted for their domestic production bases by ordering their own Typhoons. Spain, Italy and Germany have all done so; only the UK is left out. Of course, there is a wider perspective. Lancashire is home to world-class defence industries, which every growth plan in Lancashire has at its heart. The fact that I can go into schools in places such as Bacup, Whitworth and Darwen and talk about some of the best engineering and technical jobs in the world being just down the road is so vital for aspiration. The apprenticeships and career opportunities at not just BAE, but the many innovative companies in the supply chain, show that the north-west is the best place for anyone who wants to be at the cutting edge of the manufacturing industries of the future. We should not be happy with merely sustaining this jewel in the crown; rather, we should be seeking to strengthen and continually build skills, scale and competitive advantage. Turkey chose to order Typhoons from us because the experience and skills of workers at Samlesbury and Warton cannot be matched. We now have the opportunity to build on this and give the ultimate vote of confidence by ordering UK fighters that will maintain our balanced and multi-functional fast jet capability for this decade and beyond. Frankly, it feels like a no-brainer, and I hope the defence investment plan will reflect this.

• 3 Mar 2026 · Spring Forecast · Hansard source

  More

  The stability the Chancellor has brought back to our economy has allowed us to allocate record levels of infrastructure investment. Alongside the Green Book review, this creates the conditions for meaningful investment in previously left-behind places like Lancashire. Yet, as the review highlights, places like Lancashire that do not yet have a mayor can lack the capacity and capability to bring forward fully investable business cases. In recent months, myself, Lancashire colleagues and leaders of Lancashire combined authority have written to the Government asking for interim capacity funding to develop fully investable proposals. The need is urgent, so will the Chancellor meet me and colleagues to discuss how we can bring forward the game-changing growth projects that Lancashire needs?

• 5 Feb 2026 · Business of the House · Hansard source

  More

  Ever since Australia banned social media for under-16s, my office has been inundated by appeals from parents for action here in the UK. They see the very real risks of a social media wild west; they fear for their children and want to say no, and are simply asking for the Government to have their backs. As a parent of an eight-year-old, I share their fear. I am pleased that the Government have launched a consultation and I look forward to hosting listening sessions across Rossendale and Darwen. This is a complex issue; there is much to be considered. We have to get this right. Would the Leader of the House agree to an early debate in Government time to allow Members to fully explore how we best meet this generational challenge?

• 5 Feb 2026 · Road Safety · Hansard source

  More

  In my constituency, road safety is now the No. 1 issue raised with the police. Just in the last year we have seen fatalities, injuries and countless near misses across Rossendale and Darwen. My inbox is filled with emails from people telling me that the roads just do not feel safe, which is why I warmly welcome the Government’s road safety strategy, and we now must turn its ambition into reality. Let me begin with delivery. Road safety is, by necessity, delivered locally. Road safety partnerships are theoretically the main forum for this, bringing together councils, police forces and other services. Some partnerships, such as the one in Warwickshire, have shown the success that this model can bring; chaired by the PCC, they have the political backing to deliver the change we need. However, in too many parts of the country these partnerships are without that buy-in, with councils and police forces siloed and unwilling to meaningfully share resources. That is very much the picture in Lancashire, with the result being an underfunded and reactive approach to road safety that relies on outdated processes and fails to listen to our communities. To give one example, William Cartwright, an 11-year-old boy in my constituency, did not feel safe crossing a very busy road on his way to school and launched a petition asking for a zebra crossing to be built, which gained over 1,400 signatures. Despite the mass of evidence showing that the community did not deem the road safe, the Reform leadership at the county council rejected the proposal because they said too few people had been killed or seriously injured there to merit an intervention.

• 5 Feb 2026 · Road Safety · Hansard source

  More

  Absolutely; I welcome my hon. Friend’s intervention. It is outdated guidance, and it is used as an excuse to avoid taking the action that people need to see. It does not have to be this way. Neighbouring authorities—we have heard about the example of West Yorkshire—proactively listen to schools and their communities. That community-led approach must become our baseline, because listening to communities is vital. Partnerships also need resources to deliver the change we need; too often they are constrained by low levels of funding. Allowing councils to retain the fees from road offence fixed penalties, which in some cases raise millions of pounds each year, would make a real difference if ringfenced locally. Nationally, we must be strategic and dynamic with our interventions, aiming for the greatest impact by focusing on higher-risk groups. An empowered road safety board and the new road safety investigation branch could be vital in keeping policy responsive. It would be good to hear from the Minister when the board will be established, what its powers will be and whether she expects it to meet more regularly than once a year. With speeding being a key factor in 56% of all fatal collisions, this is an area where targeted action is essential. The Minister has committed to update the guidance on speed limits and enforcement, and the need for that is urgent. Just last week I was with residents on a road notorious for speeding, looking at three wrecked cars on the spot where a fatality occurred last year. Everyone knew it was only a matter of time before we saw another crash. They had spent the year calling for speed cameras, yet nothing was done. The message here is clear: communities know where the risks are, and we need to listen. That is why last month I launched a road safety campaign in Rossendale and Darwen, calling on Lancashire to adopt a new road safety approach that properly resources our road safety partnership and acts to identify and address high-risk roads before incidents occur. Our survey has already had hundreds of responses, and this coming weekend I am hosting roundtables across the constituency to bring together residents, councillors and police to identify the high-risk areas and discuss how we can make them safer. I really hope that Lancashire county council will now listen to residents and work with me to deliver safer roads and save lives. To conclude, we must end the road safety postcode lottery. Strong national leadership that sets clear expectations will be essential in supporting delivery for every community. That needs to be complemented by steps to genuinely resource delivery on the ground. If we can get this right, the road safety strategy and the lives it saves will be a legacy of which we can all be proud.

• 27 Jan 2026 · Business Rates · Hansard source

  More

  I thank the Minister for his positive engagement and his willingness to listen. It has made a big difference. His announcement will be a big relief to pubs throughout my constituency, and it shows that the Government are on their side. However, he has rightly recognised the need for more fundamental reform, so I welcome the announcement of the pub and hotel valuation methodology reviews and the high street strategy. Does he agree that this is an opportunity to think further about how the business rates system, and indeed the tax system as a whole, could be used to actively incentivise entrepreneurs to start and grow businesses and create jobs in the places where our communities need them most?

• 14 Jan 2026 · Horse and Rider Road Safety · Hansard source

  More

  It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mr Dowd. In the interests of time, I shall ditch what I assure you would have been a fascinating speech and reflect on just a couple of areas. I congratulate the hon. Member for Newbury (Mr Dillon) on securing this debate. I very much agree with and support the points he made. However, I slightly challenge the idea that because the road safety strategy does not mention horse riding specifically and repeatedly, it is not truly covered. The strategy is based on a safe system approach that recognises that all users are vulnerable, that human error is inevitable but deaths and serious injuries are not, and that the road and vehicle environment should be designed to protect all users as much as possible. In covering safe roads, roadsides, road users, speeds, vehicles and post-crash response, it is truly comprehensive. In that regard, it offers a huge number of opportunities to directly impact the safety of horse riders, such as opportunities for education, enforcement, better street design and technology that protects vulnerable road users from human error. I think the strategy is truly comprehensive and can address many of the areas that have been identified without necessarily needing to identify horse riders specifically. Members have mentioned that the strategy recognises that more needs to be done to deliver on the intent of the 2022 highway code and its hierarchy of road users, in order to recognise the vulnerability of some of those users. Will the Minister reflect on what more can be done to deliver on that intent? Finally, I recognise that safe physical infrastructure and, ideally, getting horses off the road and on to good bridleways or greenways can make a massive difference. What more can be done to ensure that local authorities genuinely have the funding to deliver the safe infrastructure for which local partnerships, including users —horse riders and others—regularly identify a need?

• 8 Jan 2026 · Road Safety Strategy · Hansard source

  More

  I thank the Minister for her statement and her great personal commitment to this vital issue. It is clear that the Government have listened to families and the road safety community and followed the evidence. She rightly recognises the importance of local partnerships in delivering on the ambitions of the strategy. Unfortunately, in Lancashire the Reform-led county council insists on waiting for fatalities and serious injuries to occur before acting, seemingly regardless of concerns raised by residents. Does the Minister agree that to deliver on this strategy and save lives, local authorities such as Lancashire must have a more proactive approach by listening to communities, identifying risk areas and acting before people are killed or injured?

• 8 Jan 2026 · Business of the House · Hansard source

  More

  A happy new year to you, Mr Speaker. In this new year, I am looking forward to seeing how the policies that this Government have delivered in their first 18 months have a real impact on the day-to-day lives of people in Rossendale and Darwen. Despite much-needed investment, including from the Pride in Place programme, Rossendale remains the only borough in the north with no commuter rail link. The fragmented nature of Lancashire politics has held that back for years, but the local government reorganisation that this Government are delivering now finally gives us the chance to give this project a fresh start. Will the Leader of the House agree to a debate in Government time on how devolution can enable projects, such as the Rawtenstall rail link, to deliver vital transport to local areas?